The thing is, naming Solich was really only the half of it.
That's a fair statement, and I don't necessarily disagree with you. But I could also say that Solich and Pelini had much better win-loss records than the other 2 coaches that have been at NU since Osborne. There are circumstances with the coaches, such as inherited talent, conference toughness, and so on, but if I look strictly at win-loss record, Solich and Pelini are much better than Callahan and Riley.
Because the past often helps shape the narrative of the hear and now, even if it isn't wholly relevant. It's the same reason people kept bringing up the goat and World Series drought and all that other nonsense with the Cubs. There was no curse. It was just a simple problem of management, coaching and talent never being on the same page for a very long time.
I understand that talking about the past does shape the narrative. I totally get it. But, when Nebraska seems to get really bad ('04, '07, '15, '17-headed that way), instead of putting blame on the coaches that are actually leading those teams, they want to put the blame elsewhere to fit their own narrative.
I agree that the blame and responsibility ultimately is in the here and now. But it is inevitable for us to keep bringing up the past decisions that have contributed to where we are as a program. Nothing we can do about it now but it is what it is. I don't think it's necessarily making things fit a narrative or diverting blame. If we don't take lessons from history then we are more apt to make similar mistakes again. I totally agree that talking about Frank, Tom, Callahan, Pederson etc. does nothing to fix our current problems but it's unavoidable when dissecting where we're at today.
...and begin to **** the bed when he was forced to recruit, and not rely on Tom's leftovers.
